Launch HN: Promise (YC W18) – Cost-effective, more humane alternative to jail
410 comments
I've been to at least 10 different county jails and to Florida State Prison twice, and I feel like I know already what you're biggest problem is going to be...
It's going to be the one(s) that screw it all up for the many.
All it's going to take is one criminal in your program to go out and kill and rob an elderly couple for society to force the politicians to end your noble and well-meaning experiment and put those people back behind bars.
I've seen it over and over in my many years of being locked up...programs designed to give inmates and convicts a shot at bettering themselves are totally abused by a few totally selfish and uncaring dickwads that actually enjoy the fact they just fucked it up for everyone else.
But regardless of that, I think your program holds great promise and wish you nothing but success with it.
It's going to be the one(s) that screw it all up for the many.
All it's going to take is one criminal in your program to go out and kill and rob an elderly couple for society to force the politicians to end your noble and well-meaning experiment and put those people back behind bars.
I've seen it over and over in my many years of being locked up...programs designed to give inmates and convicts a shot at bettering themselves are totally abused by a few totally selfish and uncaring dickwads that actually enjoy the fact they just fucked it up for everyone else.
But regardless of that, I think your program holds great promise and wish you nothing but success with it.
I think I might have a unpopular perspective but when I was incarcerated for 2 years 11 days it gave me a chance to get away from drugs for that period. Although the environment hardly supported addiction recovery, the high cost and irregular supply made drug use unsustainable. If I had made parole and gotten out after a year, I would have been right back into hard drugs. Allow me to add that I had a pretty much uninterrupted 30 or so year addiction to opiates.
I'm intrigued and inspired by what you are trying to do!
Looking into the future, I have a worry that governments will be able to back Promise into a corner. When many participants are dependent on Promise for their freedom from jail, won't governments be in a position to dictate Promise's feature set? I fear that governments will demand ever more intrusive monitoring and draconian control over participants' lives, and Promise will be unable to say no, as the alternative would put them all back in jail.
In other words, the bargain of surveillance instead of jail time may start out being a big win, but it seems at risk of getting worse over time with pressure only in one direction (towards ever-increasing surveillance and control) and no countervailing pressure in the other direction. Does Promise have ways to generate that countervailing pressure? Does it have guiding principles as to what kinds of surveillance and control it considers ethical? Does it have bright lines that it will not cross? Have you thought about how Promise can gain or wield the political power it needs to stay true to its principles?
Thanks.
Looking into the future, I have a worry that governments will be able to back Promise into a corner. When many participants are dependent on Promise for their freedom from jail, won't governments be in a position to dictate Promise's feature set? I fear that governments will demand ever more intrusive monitoring and draconian control over participants' lives, and Promise will be unable to say no, as the alternative would put them all back in jail.
In other words, the bargain of surveillance instead of jail time may start out being a big win, but it seems at risk of getting worse over time with pressure only in one direction (towards ever-increasing surveillance and control) and no countervailing pressure in the other direction. Does Promise have ways to generate that countervailing pressure? Does it have guiding principles as to what kinds of surveillance and control it considers ethical? Does it have bright lines that it will not cross? Have you thought about how Promise can gain or wield the political power it needs to stay true to its principles?
Thanks.
I want this to be successful more than any other startup I've seen in recent history. Our reform system is so outdated and broken.
Do you have a plan for how to help addicts and people with mental illness? Or is that outside your scope?
Do you have a plan for how to help addicts and people with mental illness? Or is that outside your scope?
It sounds like this is a for-profit business. I'm very leery of the trend towards private prisons. Was a non-profit considered here?
Are participants required to have a smartphone to install the app to be a part of the release program?
Are participants required to have a smartphone to install the app to be a part of the release program?
I'm conflicted about this for a few different reasons:
(1) I am always concerned about start ups with hugely impactful products that seem to lack rigor around their technology. This one will be part of determining who gets what care or who gets sent to jail. Where's the evidence that Promise will make this decision better?
(2) It seems like streamlining and increasing the ability of governments to monitor parolees. Is a warrant going to be automatically issued to someone breaking curfew because they're visiting their sick mother?
(3) It lowers the barrier into the criminal justice system. Promise says they are designed to help the criminal which makes it more attractive for judges to place people, especially juveniles, into the system.
It seems like the founders want to make a positive impact on society, but there's a whole lot of slippery slope and other ethical issues here.
(1) I am always concerned about start ups with hugely impactful products that seem to lack rigor around their technology. This one will be part of determining who gets what care or who gets sent to jail. Where's the evidence that Promise will make this decision better?
(2) It seems like streamlining and increasing the ability of governments to monitor parolees. Is a warrant going to be automatically issued to someone breaking curfew because they're visiting their sick mother?
(3) It lowers the barrier into the criminal justice system. Promise says they are designed to help the criminal which makes it more attractive for judges to place people, especially juveniles, into the system.
It seems like the founders want to make a positive impact on society, but there's a whole lot of slippery slope and other ethical issues here.
There’s this story of a private company working with big retailers to offer shoplifters some useless online “tutoring” instead of calling the police.
The shoplifters, often the poorest of the poor, had to pay hundreds of dollars for this “leniency”, often without knowing that the police wouldn’t even have come for the low-value crime.
Don’t do that.
The shoplifters, often the poorest of the poor, had to pay hundreds of dollars for this “leniency”, often without knowing that the police wouldn’t even have come for the low-value crime.
Don’t do that.
We very much appreciate the support and pushback. Both make us better. We have to present at Demo Day soon. We are not ignoring the comments, we just have to prep! We will be back online later today. Thank you.
Phaedra and Diana
Phaedra and Diana
I'm conflicted. I once spent 200 days in prison as a conscientous objector. As far as prisons go, it was about as humane as it gets. It was a so-called "open facility" in a Nordic country. We had rooms with doors that were locked st night. We worked making traffic signs in the daytime, for which we were paid a little, and the work was, in principle, voluntary. We could leave the prison compound for an hour each day for a jog or walk in the woods. It would have been easy to just not come back. It would also have been stupid. No-one ran away in the time I was there.
For all that it was barely even a prison, I resented it, and still do. Taking a person's freedom is wrong. It may be necessary for society to function, but it is still wrong. At best it's the lesser evil. And even if there was no prison, no walls, I know I would resent being told what to do in the way your system seems to require.
That said, what you're proposing still seems like it would be less bad than prison, especially prisons as I understand they are in the USA. Of the inmates I knew, practically all were addicts of some description. One young man could not grasp the idea that 110 millimeters is 11 centimeters when I tried to show him with a ruler. I don't imagine them being in prison helped very many of them, or society, in any meaningful way. The one person I felt might not return had apparently quit crime well before but been convicted of some old misdeeds when someone ratted him out.
So it sounds like your ideas are better, at least. Still, I can't say much more than that I think you're entering an enterprise that does evil in the name of the greater good. It probably needs doing, and it sounds like you're trying to reduce harm. I can't applaud you, but I hope you can accomplish your goals and live with yourselves, given the world you're entering.
For all that it was barely even a prison, I resented it, and still do. Taking a person's freedom is wrong. It may be necessary for society to function, but it is still wrong. At best it's the lesser evil. And even if there was no prison, no walls, I know I would resent being told what to do in the way your system seems to require.
That said, what you're proposing still seems like it would be less bad than prison, especially prisons as I understand they are in the USA. Of the inmates I knew, practically all were addicts of some description. One young man could not grasp the idea that 110 millimeters is 11 centimeters when I tried to show him with a ruler. I don't imagine them being in prison helped very many of them, or society, in any meaningful way. The one person I felt might not return had apparently quit crime well before but been convicted of some old misdeeds when someone ratted him out.
So it sounds like your ideas are better, at least. Still, I can't say much more than that I think you're entering an enterprise that does evil in the name of the greater good. It probably needs doing, and it sounds like you're trying to reduce harm. I can't applaud you, but I hope you can accomplish your goals and live with yourselves, given the world you're entering.
I don't see any indication of Promise being a non-profit. It seems to me that you're just trying to break into the prison-industrial complex. I am doubtful this is much better than current for-profit prisons considering you still require prisoners in order to make money. Come back as a non-profit or not-for-profit and then maybe you can change something.
As a company that will make money from people committing crime, what is your incentive to reduce crime or otherwise prevent repeat offenders?
This is a big problem that needs creative solutions.
However, I'm nervous about a for-profit, investor-backed company getting into rehabilitation and criminal justice. When criminality becomes a profit center, these supporting companies are disincentivized to reduce crime or penalties for crime.
I can imagine companies like this will participate in lobbying efforts to keep recreational drugs criminalized as that's a huge population of offenders who will needs exactly these services.
I'd have a much better feeling if it was setup as a non-profit.
However, I'm nervous about a for-profit, investor-backed company getting into rehabilitation and criminal justice. When criminality becomes a profit center, these supporting companies are disincentivized to reduce crime or penalties for crime.
I can imagine companies like this will participate in lobbying efforts to keep recreational drugs criminalized as that's a huge population of offenders who will needs exactly these services.
I'd have a much better feeling if it was setup as a non-profit.
This sounds extremely dystopian - perfecting surveillance technology in public spaces, normalizing a lower caste of unfree people, establishing a private market precedent for the cradle-to-grave nanny state.
Please stop.
Please stop.
Do you have any evidence to show in Jurisdictions where GPS is added as a condition to pretrial release that: a. Cost of bond went down; b. More defendants were granted release; or c. Less defendants violated conditions of bond?
It’s pretty common to have private contractors providing pre-trail release and probation services (at least in Florida) and I think you will find the opposite.
Take your contract for GPS Tracking, that won’t help anyone get bond who isn’t entitled to bond, and it won’t make bond cheaper for those that can’t afford it. GPS Tracking is just an added expense, it’s a condition of Pretorial release that: a) makes the contractors money and b) results in revocation of bond for violations of Pretrial/probation/parole conditions.
In my experience all these private contractors have exclusive contracts and are incentivized for people to violate (leading to charges, additional penalties, costs, etc...), for example:
-traffic schools
-DUI schools/programs
-DUI boots for cars
-DUI ignition breathalyzers
-drug testing facilities
-drug courts/treatment facilities
Ive seen more than a few HN discussions on the issues with privatized prisons. Same with the types of contracts/services I listed above, they ensure all their privatized services are added as conditions of release to the detriment of defendants, including financial burden and likelihood of violations so they end up right back where they started.
It’s pretty common to have private contractors providing pre-trail release and probation services (at least in Florida) and I think you will find the opposite.
Take your contract for GPS Tracking, that won’t help anyone get bond who isn’t entitled to bond, and it won’t make bond cheaper for those that can’t afford it. GPS Tracking is just an added expense, it’s a condition of Pretorial release that: a) makes the contractors money and b) results in revocation of bond for violations of Pretrial/probation/parole conditions.
In my experience all these private contractors have exclusive contracts and are incentivized for people to violate (leading to charges, additional penalties, costs, etc...), for example:
-traffic schools
-DUI schools/programs
-DUI boots for cars
-DUI ignition breathalyzers
-drug testing facilities
-drug courts/treatment facilities
Ive seen more than a few HN discussions on the issues with privatized prisons. Same with the types of contracts/services I listed above, they ensure all their privatized services are added as conditions of release to the detriment of defendants, including financial burden and likelihood of violations so they end up right back where they started.
What happens when Promise loses an individual? Who pays the cost for them to be tracked down and returned. I'm assuming existing systems will be used such as bounty hunters to do this job.
According to your post, one fifth of prisoners are awaiting trial.
Our constitution says that people have the right to a speedy trial.
Shouldn't we be working to make the trial process faster? Assuming that these individuals don't go to jail, I find the "promise" approach unethical for someone who is innocent.
Our constitution says that people have the right to a speedy trial.
Shouldn't we be working to make the trial process faster? Assuming that these individuals don't go to jail, I find the "promise" approach unethical for someone who is innocent.
I love what you're doing, I love your mission.
My biggest concern is the Prison Guard Union. For example, in California, they are the most powerful political group in the state. California is #41 in spending per student, but #1 in spending per prisoner.
How will you break through the prison union, when what you offer ostensibly reduces the need for prison guards?
My biggest concern is the Prison Guard Union. For example, in California, they are the most powerful political group in the state. California is #41 in spending per student, but #1 in spending per prisoner.
How will you break through the prison union, when what you offer ostensibly reduces the need for prison guards?
This feels like one of the more ambitious startups YC has funded in a while, I love it.
Has Promise been used in a real-world setting yet? I'd love to see the results.
Has Promise been used in a real-world setting yet? I'd love to see the results.
> We work in partnership with governments who release people from jail on condition that they work with Promise as an alternative to being in custody.
What does it mean for the person to "work with Promise?" Are they performing a service or labor, or simply a subject of the administration protocols mentioned later? In other words, Promise offloads the management of the individual while they await trial from local gov't to a third party?
What does it mean for the person to "work with Promise?" Are they performing a service or labor, or simply a subject of the administration protocols mentioned later? In other words, Promise offloads the management of the individual while they await trial from local gov't to a third party?
I was watching an interview of the most famous criminal lawyer of my country. He raised a family of four, they all became lawyer too. The lawyer, in his post-war lifetime, became wildly successful in defending criminals on the edge of society; Gypsies, high-profile criminals, et cetera.
In this interview, he was asked what a good justice system would look like. His reply was that real justice would involve a large factor of "making things right" for the victims. Not just pointless punishment (while punishment was certainly a factor he'd see in the system), but focused towards "making things right". If you steal, pay back the stolen goods manyfold. If you sexually abuse, do time in help centers to assist victims (obviously well-supervised). If you kill, help the family financially and do time in aftercare.
The whole focus on justice in his point of view should be to ease the burden of the act for the family/society afterwards. To me this is a really great view of fixing any wrongdoing. I hope Promise will focus on this facet as well; it would be beneficial too. Public support will definitely increase as well as the lives of victims.
In this interview, he was asked what a good justice system would look like. His reply was that real justice would involve a large factor of "making things right" for the victims. Not just pointless punishment (while punishment was certainly a factor he'd see in the system), but focused towards "making things right". If you steal, pay back the stolen goods manyfold. If you sexually abuse, do time in help centers to assist victims (obviously well-supervised). If you kill, help the family financially and do time in aftercare.
The whole focus on justice in his point of view should be to ease the burden of the act for the family/society afterwards. To me this is a really great view of fixing any wrongdoing. I hope Promise will focus on this facet as well; it would be beneficial too. Public support will definitely increase as well as the lives of victims.
The wife worked on a similar So. Cal government program for approx. 4-years in the late 90’s. Designed primarily for helping people with mental illnesses who had been arrested (a large % of jail population). My observation was that the program was very effective, but limited in scope due to funding. If interested, can put you in touch with her to discuss.
What is your sales pipeline like? Who is your initial target? I have _no_ experience in this area, but I think very small muni that dont have facilities, that have to contract out to counties or other towns could be a first good target. Esp places that know the burden that incarceration places on the rest of the people and services in those towns.
Could it also be applied to halfway house use cases? I assume you will require the user to carry a smartphone and it will have geofencing, in and out. I also assume you will be using face recognition to semi-randomly authenticate the user.
This is the first YC HN post I have ever opened, I think this is great idea, esp because most of these businesses are started by unethical leaders motivated purely by profit.
Could it also be applied to halfway house use cases? I assume you will require the user to carry a smartphone and it will have geofencing, in and out. I also assume you will be using face recognition to semi-randomly authenticate the user.
This is the first YC HN post I have ever opened, I think this is great idea, esp because most of these businesses are started by unethical leaders motivated purely by profit.
I'm not convinced. Here's why:
Punishing criminals with jail time not only makes sense from the standpoint of protecting the community from bad elements. It also serves two other purposes that are often overlooked:
Point 2 is important to instill respect for the state of law in everyone else.
I am aware that this is not in line with more progressive / liberal opinions, but I haven't come across any good alternative models so far.
Punishing criminals with jail time not only makes sense from the standpoint of protecting the community from bad elements. It also serves two other purposes that are often overlooked:
1. Retribution for the crime committed. This is especially important if the crime had one or several clear victims.
2. As a deterrent / warning for other potentially criminal actors.
Point 2 is important to instill respect for the state of law in everyone else.
I am aware that this is not in line with more progressive / liberal opinions, but I haven't come across any good alternative models so far.
This is awesome.
It's a low-tech solution to solve a common social problem. It could actually improve something for the lives of the plebes, as opposed to exploiting them through more advanced surveillance algorithms or other Machiavellian annoyances.
I worked on a rural drug court that did a lot of pretrial diversions; if we jailed every offender we'd have been living in a ghost town. Prison does not help the lives of people predisposed to addiction and due process is often a joke, especially when the charges are weak. Anything you can do to mitigate this in places with less progressive judges is an improvement.
Best of luck to you!
It's a low-tech solution to solve a common social problem. It could actually improve something for the lives of the plebes, as opposed to exploiting them through more advanced surveillance algorithms or other Machiavellian annoyances.
I worked on a rural drug court that did a lot of pretrial diversions; if we jailed every offender we'd have been living in a ghost town. Prison does not help the lives of people predisposed to addiction and due process is often a joke, especially when the charges are weak. Anything you can do to mitigate this in places with less progressive judges is an improvement.
Best of luck to you!
This sounds very (pardon the pun) promising. The prison system in the US is skewed to punishment rather than rehabilitation and utilizing tech (intelligent calendar) will help reduce prevent people missing court dates. My only concern is how will Promise be audited? Is there going to be some way of being transparent while also protecting private information?
Please don't be discouraged by pushback! The immediate reaction of a crowd to anything new/different/radical is almost always negative.
I will be rooting for this startup to succeed!
You need to identify the least riskiest of cases, identify numbers, what the current scenario and the projected outcome would look like. It does not need to be a dramatic change. At this point, what you need to be seeking is a mindset change from just jailing folks.
You need to identify the least riskiest of cases, identify numbers, what the current scenario and the projected outcome would look like. It does not need to be a dramatic change. At this point, what you need to be seeking is a mindset change from just jailing folks.
It's great that you are concerned with helping people who are convicted of crimes, but I'm very concerned about unintended consequences. This old quote comes to mind:
"You should buy a company any fool can manage because eventually, one will." (attributed to Peter Lynch)
With all respect, the founders seem well-intentioned (though my impression of them is worthless, being based on a few paragraphs) but if Promise succeeds then eventually others will run the company and there will be competitors. As Lynch says, we can't count on the managers.
Prisoners are very vulnerable. As we have seen with the for-profit prison industry and bail industry, they are abused when at the mercy of private business. For example, I read recently that in some prisons, prisoners receive only one meal on some days in order to cut costs. For profit businesses have every incentive to abuse these people and no incentive on the other side except the good intentions of management. Eventually, the management won't be so well-intentioned.
Making money from incarcerating people may be an unavoidably unethical business. Perhaps a non-profit would be a better idea.
"You should buy a company any fool can manage because eventually, one will." (attributed to Peter Lynch)
With all respect, the founders seem well-intentioned (though my impression of them is worthless, being based on a few paragraphs) but if Promise succeeds then eventually others will run the company and there will be competitors. As Lynch says, we can't count on the managers.
Prisoners are very vulnerable. As we have seen with the for-profit prison industry and bail industry, they are abused when at the mercy of private business. For example, I read recently that in some prisons, prisoners receive only one meal on some days in order to cut costs. For profit businesses have every incentive to abuse these people and no incentive on the other side except the good intentions of management. Eventually, the management won't be so well-intentioned.
Making money from incarcerating people may be an unavoidably unethical business. Perhaps a non-profit would be a better idea.
Are you guys initially focusing on a specific subset of those awaiting trial? I imagine the needs of those charged with, say, drug offenses, would be very different from the needs of those charged with, say, domestic assault.
Seems like a business that could be extremely profitable that is bad for society if I'm honest. Sometimes the answer is reversing privatization, not more of it. You're going to use an algorithm to judge suitability for your program but these algorithms are known to embed degrees of the biases already present in the justice system, in that case your service exists to extend the reach of these biases. But also I have trouble with a company whose social mission requires that it 'keeps it's hand out of the cookie jar' so to speak. On your end there will be pressure to further monetize the 'promisees', there will be pressure to restrict their freedoms further, there will be pressure to offload the costs of your program back onto taxpayers. Even if you manage to avoid those which I'm skeptical of, there will be pressure on the government side to push the costs of your program off onto pretrialers, further commoditizing an already over-commoditized system.
We are Phaedra and Diana of Promise (http://joinpromise.com/). We provide a cost-effective, more humane alternative to incarceration.
We work for government agencies to monitor and support individuals who would otherwise be in jail or who are under some form of community supervision.
There are almost 2.3 million people behind bars in the US and another 4.5+ million people on probation or parole. Almost 450,000 people are in jails pretrial, meaning they have not been convicted of the crime for which they were arrested. The majority of these individuals remain in custody because they cannot afford to pay for their release. This is costly for governments and devastating for the individuals who remain in jail who can lose their job, housing, children and more while incarcerated. Believe it or not, many of these people never even end up being charged with or convicted of a crime.
Phaedra had a background in politics (she ran the South Bay Labor Council) and Diana had a background in law (as a criminal defense attorney and co-founder of the Ella Baker Center). We then worked together at a non-profit (Green For All), in the music industry (for the musician Prince) and in technology (at Honor). We decided to start Promise because we saw a huge need for innovation in the criminal justice system and wanted to use what we had learned in tech to build something that actually helps change lives for the better and can scale.
Here's how Promise works: We work in partnership with governments who release people from jail on condition that they work with Promise as an alternative to being in custody. We also provide support to people under community supervision. We use an intake assessment to create an individualized plan that is based on the risks and needs of each participant. We provide each participant with an app and a wearable tracking device (only when required). Our goal is to always use the least restrictive means necessary and to use a step-up, step-down approach: that is, we reduce restrictions when possible and increase only when needed. While there are still restrictions on freedom, participants will no longer be in custody so that they can return to their jobs, families, and communities until their case is resolved or they no longer have any required supervision.
We then monitor and support participants to help them succeed with their plans. We provide an intelligent calendar of their obligations (court appearances, drug testing, substance abuse treatment, etc.) and adaptive reminders to help them meet these obligations. Research and experience have shown that simple intervention like this does work: for example, it makes people more likely to get to court. We also provide referrals and support so participants can receive services that may help (job training/placement, housing, counseling, etc.). We provide reports to courts or other involved parties as needed. We also allow the participants to easily view their upcoming obligations, overall plan and progress on their plan.
We believe this approach can support participants' needs, keep communities safer, and provide a cost-effective and more humane alternative to incarceration in the US. Our business model is simple: we charge governments a fee. Incarceration is so expensive that we can make a profit and still save governments—and ultimately tax payers—money.
We would love to get feedback on Promise and in particular to hear about your ideas and experiences in this area, whether working in government agencies, selling to such agencies or as individuals who have been impacted by this system. There is a huge amount of work to be done here!
Thank you!!